Well the tournament field was just announced yesterday and we already have one of those “last-minute heroics” stories we enjoy so much in March.

As readers of TCPAWorld know, last year saw the epic decision in Creasy, that determined the Supreme Court’s ruling in AAPC meant the TCPA was unconstitutional from November, 2015 until July 6, 2020 and declared that the statute was unenforceable during that period of time.

But just as a long dark night seemed to be falling on Creasy some critical good news was just handed down last week in California. In Camacho v. Hydroponics, Inc., EDCV 20-980 JGB (KKx), 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 46145 (C.D. Cal.  March 10, 2021) the district court stayed the litigation pending the outcome of an appeal to the Ninth Circuit on the Creasy issue. And that’s great!

Why?

Well not only in the Ninth Circuit historically the best about protecting the First Amendment in the Robocall context—remember that old Montana Robocall bill that was struck down recently?— but a court is much more likely to grant a stay on Creasy than to outright dismiss the case given the way the case law is developing. As I’ve explained previously, Creasy is undoubtedly correct—but it is also hard to expect a district court to pull the trigger and dismiss a case outright on constitutional grounds. A stay is a nice middle ground for the court—it can acknowledge the obvious strength of the Creasy position but still ride the fence and wait for the appellate court to do the heavy lifting.

Assuming the Ninth Circuit decision comes out in Creasy’s favor, a stay is just as good as a dismissal—maybe better because a defendant doesn’t have to incur the cost of an erstwhile appeal following dismissal. This is the TCPA equivalent of a buzzer beater. And we’ll take it.

Separately, I hate daylight savings.